About your Search

20120929
20120929
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
president of the united states bill clinton in conversation with me and my colleague at cbs nora o'donnell. >> rose: do you think this election the president has said that change has to come from outside rather than in washington, that this election has the possibility of producing a change that will be able to overcome gridlock. >> i don't think it to the only has the possibility, i think it almost certainly will. and let me explain why. i think the president's going to w but let's assume governor romney won. if he wins, that almost certainly means the republicans will hold on to the house and it will be about 50/50 in the senate, more or less the way it is now. you can't filibuster a budget. it's the only thing that doesn't require 60 votes in the senate to pass o as opposed to 51. so a lot of the policymaking will be pushed into the budget and he'll just have to pick up one or two people on that. if you assume that he is going to do what he said he's going to do, i think a lot of his priorities will be enacted. and i think it will be bad on the budget side, as i said. including
action to put our fiscal health in order and obviously that is a bigger challenge in the united states were adding a trillion dollars in debt year after year -- though how does it unplayed? >> that could serve as a source of entertainment to the canadian community. >> how do you think the u.s. does play out? >> i think that is a big risk and the frustrating thing in the u.s. is that the core is so strong and so good. you know we have illegal immigration by the way the average -- no growth over five years which includes a downturn but basically it's a big economy in 2% on a big economy as a big number and i think it goes. but it's very -- these problems are self-inflicted to a great extent and it makes it all the more frustrating and it must be frustrating to watch last summer with the debt ceiling and save why don't you compromise and why don't you get this done? i would say it's sometimes more frustrating to watch something that you can undo. it's like seeing it spiraling and you wish you could stop it and is within everybody's power to stop it. i think it's a political system to some
in the british foreign office in the united states should have the capacity to keep our eye on more than one war upon. >> i suppose the key was to negotiate. it didn't work that way. if it didn't work that way in a western democracy, the do very little chance of the work in that way in afghanistan, therefore the extent to which there is an engagement, whether it's track to her otherwise with the taliban if they think they're important because you can wait a long, long time for the kind of progress in security level, which may never happen. >> you're absolutely right. i keep using that as an example. there was no military plan that has that is the subject to defeating the insurgency. our strategy is not defeating the insurgency. >> affair in which he said among the afghan leadership. >> i think they generally want assessment. they have huge differences on what terms are prepared to accept. if you talk to afghan women, they are very worthy attempts of settlement will be to their detriment. you also talk and they don't want to give up the amount of power they've had. they've had more power than the
wanted to, first of all, i believe in check and balances in the constitution, and the united states says we should have. i don't want one party running anything. the bottom line is people -- i think 80% of the people in the united states don't even know the constitution, and for limited government, not as a progressive, which, by the way, is what obama is, a progressive, just like hillary clinton, who admitted she was. host: let's not go too far off the rails here. i understand that the constitution, the check and balances that the constitution refers to is between the legislative, the judicial, and the executive branch, and doesn't really mention the establishment of a two-party system. caller: you need a two-party system. look what happened the first two years -- even though it took obama two years to get the healthcare through, they still had everything right there. unless you have a complete representative, you know, in there that represents everyone and just not one side, like all progressives or all republicans, you don't have those checks and balances, whether it's the legislative
and federal taxes. if the united nations gets its way the united states tax me g.e.d.en could go global. >> just how friendly are our skies? "fox & friends" begins right now. snet ♪ >> good saturday morning, everyone. welcome in to "fox & friends" on this early fall morning. coming up in just about a half an hour we are going to talk about whether or not spanking should be considered a form of child abuse. one state is actually moving, perhaps, to make it that way. you could be locked up as a result of it. >> looking forward to that debate. we will answer that question. which one of us three is the funniest reporter in new york? we'll not give you any clues. >> no clues. >> i said no -- >> more on that later on in the program. >> meanwhile the top story, the news that has consumed us for the better part of two weeks now. that is what happened in benghazi? why was the message coming out of the administration so muddled at best and misleading at worse? when did they know that it was a terrorist attack? why won't the president actually use the term terrorist attack? well, yesterday there
.n. general assembly. probably not likely to be instituted or supported by the united states who is already the biggest contribute ter to the u.n. over 20% of the u.n. budget. here is what has been proposed. a 1% tax on billion nargs around the world. a tax on all currency trading in the u.s. a tiny tax on all financial transactions. >> how tiny? >> not sure. >> new taxes on carbon emissions and on airline tickets. this has for the past year these ideas have been bandied about and the overall overarching goal would be to help transfer money from richations like the united states to poor developing countries. now, what's interesting is that this would be entered into the actual record of what was discussed discussed it at t. when foxnews.com reported on this. they were suddenly sent an unsolicited statement from the u.s. mission to the u.n. the united states opposes taxes. any source of revenue should remain under the control of national authorities. this is an idea that has been kicked around for years. fortunately it hasn't gone anywhere nor will it. >> in other words, we didn't think the
, in the united states? plus the corporation is falling behind because their tax rates are going up. their businesses will go away. they will lose competitiveness. people will move, as you have just said. this is a disaster. there are things you can't see. you know, so let's say you're a surgeon and you don't want to pay 75% tax rate. so what you do, you cancel surgeries and go paint your own house, which takes away business from the painter. and the whole economy becomes inefficient. that is why, this is going to be a disaster for france. the whole world learned these kind of tax rates are highly unproductive. melissa: i don't know. they will have to watch closely to really learn that lesson because i'm not sure everybody takes that away. one of the biggest points whenever you do something like this it never brings in revenue they think it will going to. they think this will recoup 30 billion euro or $39 billion and help close the deficit next year. if you look at example. this was tried in oregon in 2010. it didn't bring the revenue they thought. tried the same experiment in illin
of substance use and treatment services for those disorders in the united states. because of the statistical power of this survey, is a prime source of information. on the scope and nature of the many substance abuse and mental health issues affecting the nation. i am also pleased to be here with our partners from the white house -- the director r. gil kerlikowske. [applause] he is one of the nation's most powerful voices for the importance of prevention of substance abuse and the support of recovery from addiction. this is recovery month, as you heard. we are especially appreciative of the efforts of everyone in this room at around the country who are interested in the messages of recovery, and what recovery means to those with mental and substance abuse disorders and their families. it is also a month in which we go beyond recovery and commit to the wellness of persons and recovery from mental illness or addictions to support the full health and well-being of these individuals, their families and their communities. he will hear this morning about both of these issues and from some of the p
to the president of the united states, who also admitted -- signed on to report last week about what would the consequences be. i'm glad you said what you said. because i think one of the consequences of striking now is that you would push iran towards the bomb. as you said, our national security establishment believes iran has not yet made that decision. they're still sort of weighing their options. one of my fears as guy who focuses on nuclear is if you attack them, then you're going to produce the very thing you seek to avoid. they're going to say oh yeah? we'll show you. because iran is one of those types of countries, very prideful. you attack us? fine. we'll show you, we're going to build a bomb. >> well, iran told the u.n. summit that any attack or sabotage of its nuclear facility would constitute nuclear terrorism. iran's foreign minister said all states have legal obligations to refrain from such an attack. >>> and in international news, the czech president is recovering from a bizarre attack. it happened while he was inaugurating a new bridge. you see that circumstance? that's a
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)